In Politico’s telling, Scott allegedly has professional associations with a political consultant who was videotaped using racial slurs.
Senator Tim Scott has made the big leagues. That’s the only logical conclusion we can reach given the tip on which Politico bit this morning.
In Politico’s telling, Scott is alleged to have professional associations with a political consultant who was once videotaped at a poker game using racial slurs. The story is based on an undated video in which a one-time congressional staffer who currently operates a consulting firm that does business with a Scott-aligned super PAC is shown using the “n-word” repeatedly, albeit in jest. The subject of Politico’s exposé worked in Scott’s office as a legislative aide in 2017 before moving on to fellow presidential candidate and former congressman Will Hurd’s office in 2018. The consultant launched the firm that contracts with Scott’s allied PAC, among other Republican outfits, in 2020.
The tidiness of this attack on Scott’s judgment suggests a rival campaign has an interest in promoting this narrative. But if this is a product of opposition research, it is only effective if it accentuates a flaw in the candidate’s character or record that Scott’s opponents can exploit. Politico gives away the game in its final paragraph: “In a 2021 response to a joint address to Congress by President Joe Biden, Scott said he’s been called the N-word by progressives and liberals,” the report concluded. “He also said during that speech that ‘America is not a racist country.’”
So, to state the subtext plainly, Scott is a hypocrite. Either out of ignorance or malice, he has surrounded himself with racially hostile compatriots, all while disingenuously claiming that racism in America is a surmountable obstacle for America’s minority citizens. Moreover, he had the temerity to attack the Left for harboring racially insensitive elements within its ranks, all while giving aid and comfort to real bigots.
It’s hard to think of a candidate less vulnerable to that line of attack than Scott (or, for that matter, Hurd). Among the slate of Republican presidential candidates, few have talked as honestly about racism in America — both acknowledging its existence and its impact on him personally while also maintaining that it is an ever-weakening force in American public life.
To capitalize on Politico’s attack, one of Scott’s opponents will have to commit to retailing the narrative that the South Carolina senator is either clueless or secretly in league with the casually racist. But it will require a lot of repeated exposition to get that impression to stick with Republican voters. As investments of political capital go, that’s a bad one.
The only question, then, is whether the Scott campaign is nimble enough to maximize the opportunities this hit job affords them. Can the Scott campaign maximize the sympathy Republican voters feel for GOP candidates who are unfairly tarnished in the mainstream press? Can it popularize the notion that this attack suggests he is the candidate the press — and, by only modest extension, the Democratic Party — fears most? Can he leverage this attempt at guilt by association to convey to donors and voters that Scott’s Republican rivals believe the senator closing the gap in early state polling?
Time will tell, but time is short. Long-shot presidential bids only get a handful of these opportunities. Scott’s campaign is advised to make the most of this one.